After holding that the mere membership of a banned organisation was not enough to prove the culpability of such members in any terror attack, the Supreme Court has gone a step further declaring that the “active” involvement is the key factor for proving the crime of even those of the “passive” members under the anti-terror laws.
The judgment coming in quick succession, was also given in a case of alleged killing of a man by Assam’s banned outfit United Liberation Front of Asom (Ulfa) even as the Union home ministry has decided to seek the review of the earlier verdict on an appeal of Arup Bhuyan, who had claimed that he had no association with the Ulfa.
The fresh verdict was given on the appeal of Sri Indira Das by the same bench of Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra, which last week had decided Mr Bhuyan’s case.
The judges said that for convicting a member of any banned outfit under TADA, his “active participation” in its terror activities was necessary and the “passive nature” of the membership was not enough to make him culpable.
“In the present case, even assuming that the appellant (Das) was a member of Ulfa, which is a banned organisation, there is no evidence to show that he did acts of violence or incited people to imminent violence.
“Thus, even if he was a member of Ulfa it has not been proved that he was an active member and not merely a passive member. Hence the decision in Bhuyan’s case squarely applies in this case,” the top court ruled in the verdict delivered on Friday.